Dáil debates

Wednesday, 12 December 2007

Social Welfare Bill 2007: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Paul GogartyPaul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)

It will be a pleasure to speak about the Bill. Some said I was a little critical of the budget in my contribution last night when I stated it was a little like the curate's egg, good in parts but turning one's stomach in others, when I referred to my education portfolio. The reason I said so was that I felt the investment in education was wholly necessary and it will cost the taxpayer in the long run.

With this legislation, I am delighted to see that the axe did not fall on social welfare. The Minister obviously felt the need to curtail some areas and I brutally disagree with him on education. Thankfully, most of the social welfare increases have exceeded the level of inflation and that will be welcomed.

Deputy Mansergh mentioned pay. I agree with him in some senses and disagree with him in others. Trying to speak about social welfare increases that are lower than the increase Ministers or Deputies get sends out a wrong message, for example, on deliberations in partnership talks. I very much welcome the belated decision to postpone the ministerial pay rises. It provides for more credibility in terms of the smaller increases proposed in this Bill. A couple of years ago when the Deputies' pay rose by 13% I described it as urinating on the less well off, where pensioners were only getting 6%.

This time around we know the economic situation. I agree with the Minister that we must tighten up a little, although it is not quite a recessionary budget. Deputy Varadkar may agree with me on the stamp duty changes, that the measures will not have much of an effect and will result in a net cost to the Exchequer. Next year's provision for stamp duty receipts will be €340 million less. I am not sure how much of that €340 million is as a result of the stamp duty measures, but in a falling market we should have let the market continue to fall, let the first-time buyers pay the lower prices and perhaps include measures for those who will suffer as a result of negative equity. That €340 million, or whatever proportion of it, could have been spent better on education and, possibly, on increasing the social welfare measures.

That said, on the whole the provisions made were good and were necessary, and particularly, for example, the contributory pension which increases by €14 per week to €223.30 per week and the non-contributory pension which increased by €12 per week to €212 per week.

Another measure I welcome is the family support programme, which is now being revamped and will have a €6.5 million budget for projects run by third parties to assist welfare recipients and members of their families to enhance their employability through education, training and personal development.

I would include there a point made by Opposition Deputies, that there are those who are entitled to the family income supplement but are not aware of it. Sometimes unfair comments are made about people who are dependent on the State, that they know every scam in the book to get their entitlements. That is plainly not the case. Many people who suffer social deprivation are not aware of half of their entitlements and lose out as a result, and perhaps more needs to be done to ensure that people collect their full entitlements. The better off in this society can claim every tax break in the book.

I welcome the fuel allowance increase, which is almost €2,200 up on the pre-budget position. I welcome the carer's allowance increase, which is necessary and is fantastic.

I take issue with the €2 per week increase in the qualified child allowance, which is not enough. CORI has stated that the momentum in tackling child poverty is lost by not dealing with this issue. The increase is less than the rate of inflation and in that context, perhaps next year we should look at increasing it by a substantial amount.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.